Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Repossession questioned by deeds not being signed


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3709 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Whilst I anticipate that some may be unhappy that I have posted this decision to this thread. I did previously say that I would not let this thread be left without an outcome.

 

People have been actively encouraged to make applications to the chamber based upon flawed fanciful ideas and a complete lack of understanding of property law. Despite people, including members of the site team, taking their time to explain those mistakes, everything to disprove those fanciful ideas was brushed under the carpet and dismissed because Apple thought they knew more about property law than anyone else

 

The decision from the Property Chamber, establishes that those fanciful ideas have no real merit. Sadly for those involved it would appear that there are now costs involved that will have to be paid, thus increasing the amount owed.

 

I take no pleasure in the application not succeeding and I do feel for those that will now owe additional amounts as a result of Apples fanciful ideas which were so heavily promoted by Is It Me? - I hope Apple and Is It Me? will make a contribution to the costs that the applicants have incurred.

 

I would appeal to everyone that reads this thread, to read the much awaited decision of the Property Chamber before deciding to follow Apple's fanciful ideas and to at least consider starting a thread here to get some real help from people that are very knowledgeable

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?197-Home-Repossessions

  • Haha 1

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear - I hope no one goes on to lose their home due to reliance on this as a defence :(

 

That has always been my main concern. I hope it is not to late

 

I hope before posting about appeals etc, Apple first considers the damage they have already done in terms of costs incurred, the likely hood of an appeal succeeding based upon how conclusively Apple's arguments were found to have no merit and how much the costs would be increased as a result of an appeal.

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The deed is by its very nature a unilateral act"

 

Yes Ben no real surprises there, I think that we may have been right in that they wanted to take the time to address all of the points in respect of other cases in the pipeline.

 

Lets hope that it is not to late for the other applicants to change their course

Edited by Dodgeball
act

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Ben no real surprises there, I think that we may have been right in that they wanted to take the time to address all of the points in respect of other cases in the pipeline.

 

The decision does indeed appear to address each point quite conclusively, leaving no need for any interpretation, no matter how mysterious and magical it may be.

 

I do share your hope that it is not too late and that not a single person loses their home as a result of following Apple's advice, instead of considering the more traditional advice offered by CAG

 

I think CAG should be commended for allowing this thread to continue through some at time heated arguments, until a decision was finally issued. Hopefully this will prevent others from incurring costs

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a message from citizen B saying the decision was in. I have a fair bit to say but not easy on a phone. It does however seem that isitme was not beung entirely credible the other day when he said no decision was made as people knew. Is apple now going to risk more of other peoples money in appealing? I imagine costs could be quite significant. I do hope is it mes friend has the funds available to pay the costs and the arrears. I take mo pleasure in someone losing their home. I just hope it stops others.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

IsitMe, Ben has simply been taking extracts from the decision which is in post 6293, I fail to see how you can accuse him of not being truthful !

 

Your post is visible and any comments you wish to make will be published as long as they are within the spirit of CAG posting rules !

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

It appears from reading the judgment that there is no right of appeal and I don't think anyone has found anything to joke about. It is also clear that the chamber wish such fanciful ideas to be quashed and will not have hesitated to make this matter of public record available. As your friend was no doubt present he will be aware of what the outcome was without seeing the judgment.

 

I do hope you're right that costs aren't as bad as both others and I feared.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IsitMe, Ben has simply been taking extracts from the decision which is in post 6293, I fail to see how you can accuse him of not being truthful !

 

Your post is visible and any comments you wish to make will be published as long as they are within the spirit of CAG posting rules !

 

Thank you citezenB,

 

There are others which can and WILL be able to PROVE as you keep asking me to do that We have NOT had the chambers ruling, as there is now another party working on this which will come to light later and an appeal will be going in and if you feel that we can not do that then that's what you think!

Edited by ims21
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

Hello Is It Me?

 

I sent an email to the Property Chamber and asked them for a copy of the decision. I received an email earlier this week asking for my postal address, so that they could send me a copy. I responded to that email and gave my postal address and today I received a copy of it in the post. As the decision is a matter of public record, anyone can email the chamber and make a similar request.

 

On what grounds would or could you appeal, the decision was quite conclusive in that none of the arguments proposed by Apple and promoted by you had any merit and were based on a misunderstanding of the law.

 

As for costs, I have no idea how much they are but I do know that legal fees are not cheap

 

From what I understand and have seen you are more than capable of posting, hence how I am able to see and respond to your post

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you citezenB,

 

There are others which can and WILL be able to PROVE as you keep asking me to do that We have NOT had the chambers ruling, as there is now another party working on this which will come to light later and an appeal will be going in and if you feel that we can not do that then that's what you think!

 

I hope this other party knows more about the applicable law than Apple

 

It is strange you have not received it. It was issued on 21 Feb 2014 and when Crapstone spoke with the Chamber last Friday, the Chamber confirmed that it had now been sent out to the parties involved.

 

However, as you have not received it, may I suggest you take the weekend at least to now read it, digest it and then consider your options.

 

Yes Mark, I am Bones

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Ben for the post but as I have stated and you have made a joke of it I have. NOT had the ruling from the chamber and I for one will be asking where and how you got it.

AS for an appeal there is NO. QUESTION that an appeal is going though and I may say at this point and to put it on notice now that what was said at the hearing to what you have posted up is like two different hearings and the tape of that hearing will prove.

As for the costs they are not as much as you think!

 

As I have not been able to post as you well know I don't think this one will go up as well but we have a note of them all and will deal with it later

 

D/m 26.

 

As Ben has stated it was pretty easy to get a copy of the decision. I have had exactly the same email and am expecting a copy to hopefully land through the post tomorrow.

 

I fail to see how NONE of the parties have had a copy yet or even know the outcome. I'm DUMBSTRUCK that you are actually sticking to that story!

 

The decision quite clearly states that any appeal is futile and all other cases relying on the same basis will be dismissed. I hope you don't cause your 'friend' any further misery or costs in pursuing this 'fanciful' theory.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As Ben has stated it was pretty easy to get a copy of the decision. I have had exactly the same email and am expecting a copy to hopefully land through the post tomorrow.

 

I fail to see how NONE of the parties have had a copy yet or even know the outcome. I'm DUMBSTRUCK that you are actually sticking to that story!

 

The decision quite clearly states that any appeal is futile and all other cases relying on the same basis will be dismissed. I hope you don't cause your 'friend' any further misery or costs in pursuing this 'fanciful' theory.

 

The results of this case have been known for some days in my opinion, the input form various posters on other forums says as much. We have just been continually led up the garden path on here, a huge vote of thanks is due to Ben and Crapstone for getting the documented evidence. so those who do not understand the arguments can at least be sure of the courts view on this.

It does make you wonder how long this would have gone on for without the judgment being unearthed, it seems that even with it, the daft claims continue.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentleman

Thank you for your replies however as it can be confirm by the post office I don't think I need your in put.

As for an appeal, I can not see any where on the document that it is not allowed.

Also as there was other things which were stated at the hearing and will be on the tape I will await a judge to make that decision and by the way

If you have a hearing and all parties have documents they rely on but then one side send documents 8 days after the hearing to which you have no knowledge of that justice is it....

If you think for one second that we will not appeal then sorry.

I also find your wolf in sheep's clothing funny if it wasn't so serious

As for thinking of others who are you kidding????? Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sick to death of the innuendo and snide comments that are being made. Isitme I am sorry but assuming your case was the one on 20th I do mot believe that you do not have the decision. The fact you state the costs aren't as much as we think suggests you do. I am assuming that Apple has now been sacked as you state someone else is dealung with it. Can I suggest you man up and tell people what is really happening.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gentleman

Thank you for your replies however as it can be confirm by the post office I don't think I need your in put.

As for an appeal, I can not see any where on the document that it is not allowed.

Also as there was other things which were stated at the hearing and will be on the tape I will await a judge to make that decision and by the way

If you have a hearing and all parties have documents they rely on but then one side send documents 8 days after the hearing to which you have no knowledge of that justice is it....

If you think for one second that we will not appeal then sorry.

I also find your wolf in sheep's clothing funny if it wasn't so serious

As for thinking of others who are you kidding????? Lol

 

On re-reading I stand corrected on the appeal issue. I'm more than willing to admit I made a mistake. I obviously misinterpreted what I read.

 

Incidentally, a big thank you to Ben for taking the time and trouble to remove names and addresses from the judgment before posting.

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this now seems to be the end of this then.

 

It is clear from the decision of the chamber that the ideas put forward to them have no merit whatsoever and they decided to dismiss the matter. It seems that the decision will also be the same with all other cases before them which are in a similar vein.

 

We had agreed to allow this thread to run to its conclusion and we have managed to achieve that despite some hassles along the way.

 

There is nothing further to be said in respect of this other than to thank those who have contributed and thanks to those who sought to get the decision sent to them and who were successful in that. As has been said, thanks to bhall for taking the time to redact the papers and post it up for all to see.

 

As this matter is now concluded this thread is now closed.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3709 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...